Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Adamczyk v. Baldwin

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

November 15, 2017

LAWRENCE ADAMCZYK, Plaintiff,
v.
STEVE BALDWIN and DR. HOLT, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Herndon, United States District Judge

         Introduction and Background

         Pending before the Court is a November 1, 2017 Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) issued by Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 39). Magistrate Judge Daly recommends that the Court deny Adamczyk's motions for preliminary injunctive relief (Docs. 24 & 30), deny the motions for hearing (Docs. 32, 33 & 34) and deny defendants' motion to strike (Doc. 33). The parties were allowed time to filed objections to the Report. On November 9, 2017, Adamczyk filed an objection to the Report (Doc. 40). Based on the applicable law, the record and the following, the Court ADOPTS the Report in its entirety.

         On February 16, 2017, plaintiff Lawrence Adamczyk, a sexually dangerous person (“SPD”), filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for deprivations of his constitutional rights based on his confinement as a SPD in the Big Muddy Correctional Center (“Big Muddy”) (Doc. 1). Adamczyk seeks declarative relief, immediate release and monetary damages. On March 23, 2017, the Court conducted a preliminary review of Adamczyk's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (Doc. 15). Based on the allegations in the complaint, the Court divided his complaint into four counts:

Count 1- against Baldwin and Holt for violations of his right to receive treatment as a SDP;
Count 2- against Baldwin and Holt for violations of his liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment by subjecting him to a punitive environment;
Count 3- alleging that Big Muddy's SDP program does not comply with the Illinois Sexually Dangerous Persons Act, 725 ILCS 205/1.01; and
Count 4- against Baldwin and Holt for breaching a duty to plaintiff when they accepted him as their ward, knowing that the SDP statutory scheme violated the Constitution.

(Doc. 15, ps. 3-4). After reviewing the claims, the Court allowed Counts 1 and 2 to proceed and dismissed with prejudice Count 3 and dismissed without prejudice Count 4 (Doc. 15, ps. 5-8). In dismissing Count 4, the Court held as to Adamczyk's repeated claims for immediate release:

“But more to the point, the Court cannot reach this argument because plaintiff's request for immediate release is not cognizable in this action, and any claim for damages stemming from his confinement and/or status as a ward would be barred by Heck v. Humphrey.
Plaintiff repeatedly requests release from Big Muddy in this action, but release is not one of the available remedies in a civil rights action. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus is the proper action ‘[i]f the prisoner is seeking what can be fairly described as a quantum change in the level of custody-whether outright freedom, or freedom subject to the limited reporting and financial constraints of bond or parole or probation.' Graham v. Broglin, 992 F.2d 379, 381 (7th Cir. 1991). Additionally, a person committed under the Illinois Sexually Dangerous Persons Act, 725 Illinois Compiled Statutes 205/0.01 et seq., may seek a release from the state court where the person was committed.”

(Doc. 15, ps. 6-7)(emphasis in original). Further, the Court noted that Adamczyk filed multiple pleadings requesting the same relief:

“The Court notes that plaintiff should attempt to confine himself to one request for relief at a time; it is improper and a drain on the Court's resources for plaintiff to file ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.